HIV surveillance based on routine testing data from antenatal clinics in Malawi (2011–2018)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The use of routinely collected data from prevention of mother-to-child transmission programs (ANC-RT) has been proposed to monitor HIV epidemic trends. This poses several challenges for surveillance, one of them being that women may opt-out of testing and/or test stock-outs may result in inconsistent service availability. In this study, we sought to empirically quantify the relationship between imperfect HIV testing coverage and HIV prevalence among pregnant women from ANC-RT data. DESIGN: We used reports from the ANC Register of all antenatal care (ANC) sites in Malawi (2011-2018), including 49 244 monthly observations, from 764 facilities, totaling 4 375 777 women. METHODS: Binomial logistic regression models with facility-level fixed effects and marginal standardization were used to assess the effect of testing coverage on HIV prevalence. RESULTS: Testing coverage increased from 78 to 98% over 2011-2018. We estimated that, had testing coverage been perfect, prevalence would have been 0.4% point lower (95% CI 0.3-0.5%) than the 7.9% observed prevalence, a relative overestimation of 6%. Bias in HIV prevalence was the highest in 2012, when testing coverage was lowest (72%), resulting in a relative overestimation of HIV prevalence of 15% (95% CI 12-17%). Overall, adjustments for imperfect testing coverage led to a subtler decline in HIV prevalence over 2011--2018. CONCLUSION: Malawi achieved high coverage of routine HIV testing in recent years. Nevertheless, imperfect testing coverage can lead to overestimation of HIV prevalence among pregnant women when coverage is suboptimal. ANC-RT data should be carefully evaluated for changes in testing coverage and completeness when used to monitor epidemic trends.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".